Page 198 - English for Writing Research Papers
P. 198

182

             Elisabetta uses four types of hedging devices. The numbers below refer to the num-
            bers in the text.

               modal verbs

                 may have  + past participle (1) indicates a probability that Elisabetta is not 100% sure about,
              but she proposes it as being a reasonable calculation based on her (and / or others’) studies
              of demographics.

                 could have  + past participle (3) refers to a past capacity that she assumes would have been
              possible.

               link words

                 yet  (2) means that despite the estimates made in the previous sentence, Elisabetta has evi-
              dence that may contradict these estimates.  however  (7) has a similar function, as again
              Elisabetta is contesting previous research.

                 thus  (4) and  in fact  (10) are used by Elisabetta to provide further support for what she has
              just said. They guide the reader in following Elisabetta’s gradual build up of logical
              evidence.
               verbs that indicate uncertainty


                 appears to have been  (5) and  would seem to  (8) are used to precede findings that Elisabetta
              wishes to propose to her community. She is a young researcher and is taking a modest
              approach, she doesn’t want to irritate the referees or readers by appearing too presumptu-
              ous. Although (5) uses the present tense and (8) uses the conditional, in reality there is only
              a minimal difference – the conditional just adds another 10% of softening!

               adverbs

                 probably  (6) and  necessarily  (9) are both used to qualify the verb  built . Elisabetta uses these
              adverbs to soften the impact and implications of what she is saying. Again, she is protecting
              herself from possible criticism by other authors and from future research that might invali-
              date her theories.

             Elisabetta concludes her discussion by providing evidence that the Romans could
            have built the aqueduct much earlier if they had wanted to, and that the real reason
            for the aqueduct was to supply thermal baths and monumental fountains, and to
            irrigate fi elds.


               Our findings (11)  suggest  that the aqueduct in Gortyn cannot have been built earlier than the
              second century AD. In fact, archaeological data show that many cities, like Gortyn, had a
              high standard of urban, social and political life even before the Roman age.
               (12)  There is thus evidence  that the aqueduct only became necessary when “Rome” decided
              to transform Gortyn into a Roman provincial capital, which entailed Gortyn having thermal
              baths, monumental fountains, theatre, amphitheatre and well-irrigated and cultivated land
              to supply its inhabitants.
   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203